Would like to hear more from your perspective on the desalination plants. The fishing conservationists I know on the lower coast think they are a terrible idea (for the fishery and coastal habitat) and that they will have considerable negative impacts on the fisheries for miles around the plants' outflows/discharge areas.

I assume environmental impact will be affected by discharge location and tidal flow. I do understand the benefit for the population centers.

Discharge of the brine is a big issue.

Jen78 said:

---

As a environmental consultant of 20 plus years the thought that this permit going beyond impacts analysis floors me. A public / government entity allowing a resource being strictly used for private use sickens me. I am a resident of Calhoun County and have made my voice heard.

Also, yes Formosa may continue to receive fines but there is no recourse for them to pay. Chevk their record on that. That little wetland project in Lavaca Bay is a publicity stunt and nothing more.
Ugh!

---

Is that what the dirt pile on the north side of 35 where the old barges were is supposed to be? Even if it gets established it isn't big enough to benefit anything.

They pay pretty well, but it's basically a monthly operating expense and never increases.

Jen, have you commented? Maybe a few of us consultants should get together and pen something up.

I'm about to.

There are quite a few of us on here...

I would think it might also help to pull resources together - but that removes some anonymity we have...

I am going to draft up a lengthy response on Monday and if anyone wants to review it and then add, or piggy back let me know. PM me and we can get an email chain going.

Kudos to CivilAg08 for bringing this to folks' attention

I may have missed it, but I didn't see this on Public Notice. Do they already have their 401?

Will have to check.

I'll say that Shane Bonnot was the person that I first learned about this from. At that time there were only about 50 comments made for the first couple of weeks on the permit, including those made when it was still a draft permit. Last I checked, there were well over 200, so getting visibility and mobilizing people has definitely been a success so far.

Hopefully they'll move forward with a public meeting or series of public meetings, and it will again be important for people to show up to have their voices heard. Especially those who are local to the impacted area.

There are a lot of great folks and groups who have helped to bring awareness to this issue and many others, and it's important to get and stay involved with them. I don't care who you decide to get involved with (I'll suggest BHA ), but at only $30-$50 a year for membership, everyone here should aim to join at least 2-3 sportsman's and conservation groups, and then do more with it than just get a magazine in the mail a few times a year.

I ran across this article about one of the chief plaintiffs. It was an interesting read, written to compliment the plaintiff who won the case and then an environmental award.

Is this correct, or is this just typical clickbait media content?

https://www.desmog.com/2023/04/24/texas-shrimper-activist-diane-wilson-led-fight-to-stop-plastic-pollution-goldman-prize/

Diane is an interesting cat.

rab79 said:

---

Jen78 said:

---

As a environmental consultant of 20 plus years the thought that this permit going beyond impacts analysis floors me. A public / government entity allowing a resource being strictly used for private use sickens me. I am a resident of Calhoun County and have made my voice heard.

Also, yes Formosa may continue to receive fines but there is no recourse for them to pay. Chevk their record on that. That little wetland project in Lavaca Bay is a publicity stunt and nothing more.
Ugh!

---

Is that what the dirt pile on the north side of 35 where the old barges were is supposed to be? Even if it gets established it isn't big enough to benefit anything.

---

Yes that dirt pile is designated as one of their wetland projects to serve as "restitution". They basically moved sand and planted grasses trying to extend the shoreline. I guess they were trying to create a tidal wetland, but to me it just looks like something to reestablish something that was already removed due to 35.

I already commented on the permit and requesting a public hearing. I was in Victoria this weekend (had to go to town) and the people I spoke with had no idea that this was coming.

I think comments might close today. As of right now, 305 total comments on the permit.

This tally lags because someone has to read them and categorize them which takes a couple of days. That's why it doesn't add up.
145 comments
27 hearing requests
67 meeting requests

Looks like Senator Kolkhorst and Representative Lozano also requested a meeting, so that bodes well.

https://www14.tceq.texas.gov/epic/eCID/index.cfm?fuseaction=main.download&doc_id=860548042024085&doc_name=SENATOR%20KOLKHORST%20%26%20REP%20LOZANO%2Epdf

Comments like "Formosa bad!" Don't get calculated into the mix typically cuz you can't respond to that.

If you want to know about how Formosa operates, watch Dirty Money, Season 2 Episode 6 "Point Comfort" on Netflix.

Update - sort of.

NWF Wins Environmental Flow Protections in the Guadalupe River Basin (note this is NOT the Formosa request) but talks about it and gives a lot of headway that it'll be denied or go under MUCH more strict review.


https://texaslivingwaters.org/nwf-wins-environmental-flow-protections-in-the-guadalupe-river-basin/

OnlyForNow said:

---

Update - sort of.

NWF Wins Environmental Flow Protections in the Guadalupe River Basin (note this is NOT the Formosa request) but talks about it and gives a lot of headway that it'll be denied or go under MUCH more strict review.


https://texaslivingwaters.org/nwf-wins-environmental-flow-protections-in-the-guadalupe-river-basin/

---

What is your gut feeling on this going through? I know you work in that space and are a sharp guy, so curious as to your thgouhts.

It really depends on how much "pay for play" the 'in office' politicians want to get with the money being thrown their way.

The money is certainly not clean nor American, so they are slightly less likely to take the bait and push this through but it's also probably a ****load of money being thrown around.

It also got completely blown up via social media which everyone on the in favor side of things was hoping wouldn't happen. Now that the cats out of the bag and it's been a rally banner for certain groups and others who also have $$$ it's kinda swung back around, going from probably a sure-thing to a less than 50% thing.

I mean, it's an absolute travesty that the privatization of the river could occur… but the San Antonio River, San Jacinto, and Colorado and in similar boats just with lesser volume percentages being sucked up by industry.

The state SHOULD, in my opinion, step in and say no, absolutely not, and recommend that if they need the water they should build a desalination plant, and I'd even be in favor of significant tax incentives for them to do this and prove it works, but taking the last remaining drops of fresh water out of the Guad system that far south will be extremely detrimental to the bay system and everyone knows it.

Overall, at this point in time, and I'm not fully re-upped on the latest info, I'd say it's got a 40% percent chance of happening.

I attended the public meeting in Ganada several months ago and the representative for the river authority spoke down to people and acted like his job was to sell water and make money, which is partially true (which is horrible). TCEQ punted all environmental concerns (including historic resources) to the US Army Corp which would take jurisdiction over the construction or modification of the river.

The pipeline would require an easement, and has long as the property owners hold out eminent domain would be required (which they have already thought of that by adding drinking water to the use of the project). Going that route will take time and hopefully Formosa will cut bait by that point.